Harry Potter fans aren't ready for what I'm going to say.

I know I'm going to piss a lot of people off for what I'm going to say here. For reference I have read the books, I know the movies have different portrayals of the character's than the books. This is a special interest of mine so buckle up cause I'm going to piss off a lot of you.

Firstly, Harry and Draco meet at the robe shop in the books, not on the stairs like the movies. Draco doesn't even know he's talking to Harry; he's just asking him questions like what house does he think he will be in, does he play Quidditch, and if he has his own broom. Standard questions and while he's a bit snobbish he's not being a total prick. Draco doesn't even ask what Harry's blood status is, he's just talking to a stranger and enjoying the conversation. I know it doesn't seem like a big deal, but I think it's something to note since he's pretty spiteful of muggleborns even when he's real young. He could have easily presumed that Harry was muggleborn but he didn't.

Draco in the books is more easily hated and it's more understandable, he's a huge prick. But we also only see Harry's point of view since the series is in his narrative. A lot of different characters also comment on how much of a prick Draco is and it's usually because he is being a prick. In the movies, whilst still being a bully, it seems that he's just reflecting on his environment because his dad seems to be abusive. Note, this is in the movies ONLY!! In the books it's showed that Narcissa and Lucius really care about their son and dote on him all the time. They're not abusive like Lucius is portrayed to be in the movies. That was a change to make Draco seem more redeemable.

With that big change in the movies, it also shows us how another pureblood wizarding family lived. The Blacks, specifically Sirus and Regulus Black. Granted, Draco was the only child of Narcissa and Lucius, but it gave insight on how the Black brothers lived. In the books Sirius tells us about his family and their pureblood beliefs. The movies kind of gloss over this, they don't even include his mother's screaming portrait in 12 Grimmauld Place. In general, we don't really know a lot on Regulus even from the books. He was Sirius' younger brother, sorted into Slytherin, 16 when he got the mark and about 17 or 18 when he died. Later we find out Regulus tried to defy the Dark Lord, but he dies trying to destroy the Horcrux. The Blacks (minus Sirius) were a long line of purebloods beliefs and were in Slytherin. He got his mark to make his family proud, later finding out he doesn't quite agree with the Death Eaters or specifically Tom Riddle.

Does this sound familiar? Draco allegedly gets his marked at 16 too. I say allegedly because in the books it's never stated that he gets his mark, just that Harry suspects it and becomes obsessed with Draco. Whilst in the movies he does get his mark. Draco comes from a pureblood family, long line of Slytherin, pureblood beliefs, supposedly gets the mark at 16 or mingled into the cult without the mark, and tries to defy Voldemort. Granted he wasn't directly defying Voldemort, but I still find it nice to highlight knowing that he did save Harry's life by lying to his aunt about the person they captured wasn't Harry. It shows that he might have some good in his heart or maybe he just didn't want to see his classmates tortured in front of him.

Draco gets a lot of hate for his character and because he didn't openly rebel against the beliefs placed upon him, or because he didn't try to rebel more against the Dark Lord. Let's put this into perspective: You're an angsty teenager, used to be the center of your parents' world, the world you've grown up in is rapidly getting scarier, your dad is in a cult, the cult leader is living in your childhood home, you get punished for your father's failure to grab a prophecy, and now you have to kill your headmaster at 16. This is a lot to ask for a 16-year-old boy, and I think a lot of people forget that he is such that: just a boy. Being tasked to assassinate someone at any age is hard but at 16 is rough. People seem to just sweep this under the rug because "He didn't have to be a Death Eater" or "He could've given up on his beliefs". That's ludicrous to say, Draco probably felt very pressured and forced to such a vile act. He also had witnessed the death of at least two teachers, maybe more murders.

Harry Potter is the Boy Who Lived while Draco Malfoy is more of the Boy Who Had No Choice. Harry and Draco are both sides of the same coin, and that's really cool when you look at them in that perspective. Both of them are rich, influential families, very powerful wizards, amazing Quidditch players, saved from a mother's love, and both doomed to fulfill their own destinies, tasks neither of them wanted. Harry becomes the savior of the wizarding world whilst Draco is more of a pawn and disgrace to nearly everyone by the end. 

Overall, Draco is a very complex character when you actually dig down and look at him. He deserves some credit for the hard trials he went through and shouldn't be deemed as unredeemable. He's a 16-year-old boy living through a war and probably scared for his own life. Draco is so cool when you see he's a parallel of Harry and Regulus. It's very interesting narratively seeing the parallels between each character as there's a lot more, Ron Weasley housing Harry is a parallel to James Potter housing Sirius. There's a few more but this post is already long enough.

Thanks for reading!